Lewiston teller. [volume] (Lewiston, North Idaho) 1878-1900, 1887-03-24
DOCTOR xnL1 rs LETTER.

DOCTOR xnL1 rs LHrTnR.
We republish Ex-Mayor Kelly's
coinmunication found in the NeUs. 1t
was intended for both papers last week,
but it did not reach the TELLER Office
till too late.
En-. Neus We in the north have
been advocating the annexation Of our
four counties to Washington Territory
on open grounds, giving our reasons,
which. as yet, have never been contra
dicted. No one ever attempted to an.
swer them. And whyf 1t is simply
because there are no reasons Why We
should not be annexed. After laboring
Tor % many yeau and finally succeeding
in getting the thing through both houses
OF congress, no one opposing, our COVER
nor, yes our "holy Moses" Of . governor,
telegraphed to President Cleveland not
to sign the bin because he did not think
il good policy to divide the territory.
Obi what . magnanimous act; what
. usurpation Of power, and after congress
had passed the bill almost unanimously.
What : cowardly act for man occupy
ing the position that Stevenson does to
attempt to thwart the wishes of the peo-
pie, likewise the act Of the congress Of
the United States. II WIS this cowardly
principle that stole the capitol from rs.
II was tth oowardly principle that in
duced our Northern delegation in the
18th territorial Legislature to vote for the
capitol and asylum bill, under ! promise
that they-tbe South would vote for a
memorial to congress fhvoring anuexa-
ton. It was this cowardly principle
that actuatsd South Idaho the following
season to send to congress remonstranoes
against. annexation, after memorialising
congress the previous winter for it. 1t
was tb;s cowardly principal that hood
WINGED the democratic convention in the
North to endorse Singissr when be first
ran for delegate 70 congress- He and
others from the South told the North
that he was in favor Of annexation. Il
was this same cowardly principle that
actuates the Boise Ring frst, last and al
tho time. The Boise leaders have in
every act relative to annexation proven
themselves to be the most pusihuimous
gang q eowardly opponents that I ever
knew, being entirely void OF honesty,
touching this subject. And what makes
the matter moro obnoxious and odorous
. the fact that there are few-and
thank God but 4 few-in the North who
in anticipation Of getting some COVER
ment Office, clandestinely affiliate with
our Boise friends. The republicans in
the North at the last election voted for
Fred Dubois and ct the same time voted
for annexation, showing most conclusive.
y that those who voted for him did %
on the ground Of bis republican proclivi-
ties and not because he was opposed to
annexation. On tho other hand both
democrats and republicans IN tho South
voted for him, not because he is q re-.
publican, bat because be is opposed to
annexation. The people in the North
being more DESTROYS, under Ill circum-
RANGES, % cultivate = political spirit
among themselves than the people Of the
South get too enthusiastic over their can
aidatcs and often lose sight Of the main
question At isue, consequently defeating
4 - was the caso a our Last election,
Rhich is already proved BY Dubois
|stter to bis brother, which stated that
HALEY vas true to annexation up to the
adjournment Of oongres. I am forced
. think that bad the republicans in the
North voted for HALEY instead Of Dubois,
y the democrats in the North did for
3iugiser instead Of Ainsley, that be
night have been returned to congress,
md in that case things might have
AIKEN different course. However, the
md y not yet, - We will be found plead
ng for our rights 70 the end. We do
lot, and we will not, Get upon any claim
hat Is wrong, but for our rights We will
ret tight, and continue to fight SO long as
here is any hope Of relief. We never
An become etate with our present
and in fact ve ought not,
rom the fact that the North and South |
re - efectually separated from each |
'ther ~ nature could have them. The
payetts mountains form an impossible
'azier, onttisg the North of from the |
3outh as.completely a. though nature |
hus intended it.
In ny judgement no executive should |
xercise the veto power unless a legis-
ltivs body, by misrepresentation or